Loading...
2005 06 07 RDA Minutes LA GUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES JUNE 7, 2005 A regular meeting of the La Guinta Redevelopment Agency was called to order by Chairman Osborne. PRESENT: Board Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Chairman Osborne ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT - None CLOSED SESSION 1 . Conference with Agency's legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a), regarding pending litigation, La Quinta Redevelopment Agency v. KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. , Riverside Superior Court Case No. INC 044575. 2.~ Conference with Agency's real property negotiator, Douglas Evans, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning potential terms and conditions of acquisition and/or disposition of real property located at the northwest corner of Avenue 48 and Dune Palms Road (APN: 649-303-034). Property Owner/Negotiator: Alfredo Izmajtovich. 3. Conference with Agency's real property negotiator, Mark Weiss, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 concerning potential terms and conditions of acquisition and/or disposition of 2 ± acres located at the southwest corner of Dune Palms Road and Highway 111. Property Owner/Negotiator: Chris Clarke, Stamko Development. Redevelopment Agency recessed to Closed Session to and until the hour of 3:00 p.m. 3:00 P.M. Redevelopment Agency Minutes 2 June 7, 2005 STUDY SESSION 1 . DISCUSSION OF ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO SilverRock RESORT. Assistant Executive Director Weiss presented the staff report. In response to Board Member Adolph, Mr. Weiss stated he believes the City Code requires split-rail fencing with multi-purpose trails. Board Member Adolph noted the multi-purpose trail won't be next to the curb as it is on other streets, and he hates to see a fence placed in front of the expensive stone wall. He asked staff to find out if the fencing is required if the trail is away from the curb. He also inquired about the drainage, and asked if $1.4 million had already been approved for drainage repairs. Mr. Weiss stated the previous drainage costs were primarily for the drainage bypass on Avenue 52. Board Member Adolph asked if this will be the last of the drainage improvements. Public Works Director Jonasson explained part of the $1.4 million went to Weitz Golf for storm damage and modifications to bunkers, and $400,000 to $500,000 was set aside for offsite drainage. He indicated he doesn't recall anything being brought forward to the Agency for the mountain runoff, and noted some of the areas damaged by the storms have been left in order to see where the runoff enters the golf course. He added he feels these improvements will address up to a 10-year storm. Mr. Weiss noted the intent is to drain the water to the lakes and off the golf course to make it playable within a 24-hour period. He stated there are probably larger and more expensive systems that can be used if the Council wants to improve upon that standard. He has been told that you can't really know what will happen until the rains occur, and he noted the recent storms happened at the worst possible time because the landscaping and turf were not in place and the native soil had just been moved. However, staff cannot guarantee this will be last drainage expense on the site. Board Member Adolph stated he hopes the hydrology experts will tell the City what needs to be done to handle a normal-type storm. He Redevelopment Agency Minutes 3 June 7, 2005 stated he agrees with the native land and grassing improvements and with the perimeter decomposed granite. He also reiterated his desire for staff to find out if the split-rail fence is required. Mr. Jonasson stated the fencing requirement is in the engineering standards, and developments are regularly conditioned to include it. Board Member Henderson stated she discussed the possibility with staff about changing the ordinance not to require a fence when a certain distance exists between the curb and sidewalk. However, it wouldn't go very well with the developers who have already had to install the fences. Agency Counsel Jenson stated the requirement is not in the City Code but might be in the General Plan. Board Member Adolph noted the requirement was added because of horses but he doesn't see horses on the trails. Board Member Henderson stated she doesn't believe the rustic-style rail fence will deter from the wall. Board Member Sniff stated he feels the rail fencing could be attractive but voiced concern about using plastic material that tends to soften in heat. Mr. Jonasson stated the City has been using recycled products throughout the City for a long time but he isn't aware of any rail fencing being used. Board Member Sniff noted park benches don't have the same span as rail fencing, and stated he feels it would be a mistake to consider using the plastic material. Chairman Osborne stated he feels the City should install rail fencing if the developers are required to use it, and that plastic shouldn't be used if it doesn't hold up in heat. He indicated he would go along with white for the color. Board Member Perkins spoke in favor of using dark plastic because he believes wood fencing would require more maintenance. He noted it may be more expensive initially but would cost less in the long term, Redevelopment Agency Minutes 4 June 7, 2005 Council Member Henderson agreed with using a darker color, and stated she would support plastic if the distance between posts is adjusted. She referenced a plastic fence on Avenue 52 that has been there for 1 0 years. Ms. Jenson advised the rail fencing is a requirement of the engineering standards that were adopted by resolution and subject to modification, Board Member Adolph stated he believes the issue came up when the trail was close to the curb. Board Member Henderson stated she believes there are a few places in this trail that meanders closer to the street and may need some adjustment. Board Member Sniff suggested the posts and rails be different compatible colors, and using shorter rail lengths if plastic material is used. Mr. Jonasson clarified the plastic PVC material used at The Hideaway and in front of the Norman Course is not the recycled material referenced in the staff report. He added there may be some recycled materials that are not as susceptible to heat as others. Chairman Osborne requested staff come back with some options for split-rail fencing materials. He asked if there was any discussion regarding the use of decomposed granite in the perimeter landscaping, and there was none. In regard to mountain runoff and drainage, Board Member Sniff stated he has disagreed on this issue before. As for the storms this year, he agreed they were prolonged but not major, and noted the mountains in that area are prone to monsoon flooding. He voiced disappointment that the consultants didn't have a handle on this. In response to Chairman Osborne, Mark Kribbs, of PACE Engineering, stated as of today, no money has been spent to deal with drainage from the mountains. He indicated that was done purposefully, and an area was set aside to deal with it. The magnitude of the runoff has been calculated and verified by the rains. He explained golf courses with major drainage issues, such as this one has, will shift and make it known where the flow will go. He stated nothing is being replaced but rather addresses the original issue. The course was designed to accept the runoff and graded accordingly but the area from the toe of Redevelopment Agency Minutes 5 June 7, 2005 the mountain to the course was delayed because until the course was graded, it wasn't known where the flow would go. He stated the flow rates are essentially as estimated, except for the off-site Calle Rondo channel, and flow is being allocated proportionately to the Phase 1 and 2 areas. He stated he doesn't believe any mistake was made because the as-built grading plan shows where the storm volume will go. Chairman Osborne asked if the design did not include what damage might be done by water. Mr. Jonasson stated the volume estimates were based on the hydrology for the site but it's difficult to predict where the water will enter the course from the mountains. He feels it's appropriate now to make adjustments, based on the erosion that has taken place, so that damage to the course in the future is at least minimized. Mr. Kribbs stated the original master drainage plan showed the volume within the golf course areas and where storage would occur. It also provided general direction to design channels and pipes to convey the runoff from the edge of the mountains into those areas. He feels it would have been a waste of money to try to do it upfront. Dan Reese, of The Keith Companies (TKC), stated the proposed design will take the off-site flows onto the golf course and route them into channels to minimize damage from mountain runoff. He agreed it's difficult to predict where drainage will go until the grading is completed. He confirmed these drainage changes are customary for golf courses. Board Member Adolph commented that it would have been nice for that information to be communicated to the Agency earlier. Mr. Reese agreed they could have done a better job educating the Agency on that issue. Mr. Weiss asked if the Agency wants staff to research what it would take to change the rail fencing requirement for this project. Board Member Adolph responded, IIYes." Board Member Henderson stated she is somewhat torn because there seems to be a reason to find an exemption for budget purposes but for Redevelopment Agency Minutes 6 June 7, 2005 consistency in the City, she doesn't feel it will look that bad, and is also not sure enough space will exist in some areas to be exempted. Board Member Perkins stated he feels there are places for the fencing and places where it's not needed. Board Member Sniff spoke in favor of including the rail fencing. He feels it could be a significant improvement if done tastefully and the rails are shortened if plastic material is used. Board Member Henderson suggested installing the fencing where the multi-use trail is close to the street and none where it's not. Board Member Sniff agreed. Chairman Osborne requested staff come back with different designs, materials, and colors for the rail fencing. Mr. Weiss stated staff will proceed with the plans, specifications, and engineer's estimate to bid the items if the Agency is comfortable with the recommended funding sources. Staff proposes coming back with an amendment to the Landmark contract to add the two areas involving General Fund monies as a supplemental and not part of their base budget. Board Member Adolph referenced the letter from Mr. Larsen, and stated he appreciates his honesty regarding obvious mistakes being made and the need to correct the problem. He isn't sure what Palmer COurse Design will do, except to provide suggestions for changes that the City will have to pay for, He also questioned the statement that SilverRock II can be tournament quality." He noted the criteria provided by the Agency from the beginning was that the course had to meet the standards and quality of a PGA golf course. That is what the professionals were paid to do, and now the City is looking at having to spend millions of dollars to correct the situation. He feels a lot of work needs to be done to bring the course up to PGA standards. Eric Larsen, of Palmer Course Design, stated Mr. Palmer is very concerned about this, and interested in how they are going to make corrections. He apologized for how things came out, and stated they take responsibility for not understanding how those storms would impact the course. He feels there were some mistakes in communication within the team and in conveying it to the Agency. ','. - "'!'If'I"--',\ 0;;.--------- Redevelopment Agency Minutes 7 June 7, 2005 Board Member Adolph noted there are other issues such as having waste bunkers against the greens. He realizes the issues will be corrected and the course will be a quality course but it should have been quality in the beginning. Mr. Larsen agreed. He noted the waste bunkers next to the greens were approved by the tour groups but Palmer Course Design felt it's not a good playable surface close to the greens, and they are making those corrections. He feels the course is terrific and that Landmark is doing a great job maintaining the playing surfaces. Once the improvements are made, he believes in one to two years the golf course will be one of the most striking courses in the Valley and playable throughout. Board Member Henderson stated she understands from other golf course owners, that the first year is the toughest when most golf courses go through some major renovation. She thanked him for his willingness to address the Agency. Mr. Larsen stated Palmer Course Design will stay involved at no further cost to the City. Board Member Perkins stated he looks to the exp~rts to tell the Agency what should be done, and agrees the first year has its problems. He stated the project may have moved too fast but feels the City can have a top notch golf course if everyone works together. Board Member Sniff stated he feels the consultants and design group should have talked and listened to the people who have long-term history in this area, He disagreed with a statement in the letter about the storm being of unrecorded intensity, and stated he believes the storm was relatively minor in the scope of things. He feels it's Important for the areas next to the mountains to be improved, and urged the designers and engineers to plan for a major storm and to address the problem. Board Member Adolph commented on the Norman Course, Mountain View Course, and the Trilogy Course being in fine shape the first year. Chairman Osborne encouraged the consultants to heed the warnings about potential major storms, Redevelopment Agency Minutes 8 June 7, 2005 Redevelopment Agency recessed to the City Council meeting to and until 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE THIRD FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND THE SECOND TEN-YEAR AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLIANCE PLAN FOR LA QUINT A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NOS. 1 AND 2. Consultant Frank Spevacek presented the staff report. In response to Board Member Henderson, Mr. Spevacek confirmed the 230 affordable dwellings are in addition to the 641 unit deficit. He explained the numbers are generated by the private sector's activity in building houses in both project areas. In general, 15 % of all privately- developed or substantially-rehabilitated units, in both project areas, are required to be affordable to very-low, low, and moderate-income households. Board Member Adolph inquired about how many years the State has required the Agency to reallocate non-housing redevelopment money to the ERAF. Mr. Spevacek stated it occurred in the early 1 990s and again in the last two or three years. It is supposed to occur again in Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and then expire, however, the plan is structured for it to stay in place. In response to Chairman Osborne, Mr. Spevacek confirmed the statement on Page 3 that lithe Agency did not directly develop any affordable housing during this period" was in reference to construction only. He noted the Vista Dunes project will be a direct Agency affordable housing development. In reference to the auditor's comment on Page 4, he explained the auditor looks at compliance with State Law requirements, and found the Implementation Plan should have been adopted by December 2004. The Chair declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 8:12 p.m. There being no requests, the Chair declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:12 p.m. Redevelopment Agency Minutes 9 June 7, 2005 RESOLUTION NO. RA 2005-005 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A THIRD FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR 2004/2005 THROUGH 2008/2009 FOR LA QUINT A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 1 AND LA aUINTA PROJECT AREA NO.2. It was moved by Board Members Sniff/Adolph to adopt Resolution No. RA 2005-005 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. The Agency recessed to the City Council meeting. The Agency reconvened. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed APPROVAL OF MI~UTES MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Redevelopment Agency Minutes of May 17, 2005 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Sniff/Adolph to approve the Redevelopment Agency Special Meeting Minutes of May 18, 2005 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT CALENDAR In reference to Item No.3, Chairman Osborne noted this change order makes a 30% increase over the original budget. Council Member Sniff voiced concern about the continual increases, and questioned how long it can continue. 1. APPROVAL OF DEMAND REGISTER DATED JUNE 7,2005. 2. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33445(a) AND APPROVAL OF A FINANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF Redevelopment Agency Minutes 10 June 7, 2005 LA QUINT A AND THE LA QUINT A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 2003-14. (RESOLUTION NO. RA 2005-006) 3. APPROVAL OF CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO.7, PROJECT NO. 2002-07F, SilverRock RESORT ON SITE AND OFFSITE SEWER, WATER, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION - It was moved by Board Members Adolph/Sniff to approve the Consent Calendar as recommended and with Item No. 2 being approved by RESOLUTION NO. RA 2005-006. Motion carried unanimously. BUSINESS SESSION - None CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS' ITEMS - None The Redevelopment Agency recessed to Closed Session as delineated on Page 1. The Redevelopment Agency meeting was reconvened with no decisions being made in Closed Session which require reporting pursuant to Section 54957.1 of the Government Code (Brown Act). ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, ~JZ1. ~ JUNE S. GREEK, Secretary City of La Quinta, California